Re: Git and tarballs

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Wed, 06 Jul 2011, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> Tarball only
> 
> 
> Branches
> 
> 
> NameLocal/RemoteMerges From Tracks
> -
> master  local   n/a alioth/master
> upstreamlocal   n/a alioth/upstream
> pristine-tarlocal   n/a alioth/pristine-tar
> alioth/master   remote  n/a
> alioth/upstream remote  n/a
> altoth/pristine-tar remote  n/a
> 
> Workflow
> 
> 
> Tarballs are downloaded from upstream and merged with git-import-orig, 
> orig tarballs are constructed from upstream + pristine-tar.
> 
> Questions
> -
> 
> * Is pristine-tar *really* needed here as it will basically say "No change 
> from
>   upstream"? 
>   I have to confess that I don't quite see the merit of pristine-tar
>   when generating tarballs as those should be exactly the same tarball
>   as produced by "git archive TAG. Or am I missing something here?

You are missing the fact that the two tarballs will be different because:
1/ the files in the archive might not be in the same order
2/ the "gzip" compression might be different (it embeds a timestamp and
   the name of the original file by default)

The goal of pristine-tar is to regenerate exactly the same tarball (i.e.
same MD5/SHA1/etc. checksum).

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Follow my Debian News ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.com (English)
  ▶ http://RaphaelHertzog.fr (Français)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110708063110.gk8...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Karl Goetz]

On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 07:27:21 +0200
Kilian Krause  wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause 
> > wrote:

> > > Does anyone know the current status of the new mentors.d.n?
> > 
> > Hasn't seen many commits recently, info:
> > 
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Debexpo
> 
> Actually all three site listed there are down. So to me this seems
> pretty much like MIA. That was why I thought maybe we can revive this
> and get it rolled out the door together? Any takers?

The VM "Goes away" now and then. just ping in #debexpo (oftc) and it
will probably come back to life (: (I have sent such a ping).

thanks,
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Ben Finney]

Paul Wise  writes:

> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean.

Thanks for raising this topic for discussion.

> If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it to in
> order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use lintian and
> fix any issues found.

Suggested replacement:

Here is the ‘lintian’ commandline I ran, and its output:

That way, if it's left empty we know the sumbitter didn't even bother
filling out the form properly and we can draw attention to that without
wasting time on our own run of Lintian.

If it's populated without the exact Lintian commandline that was used,
we can ask for that and likely begin the discussion about which options
should be enabled.

If it's got appropriate options but is not clean, that also begins a
useful discussion about fixing those issues reported by Lintian.

If it's got all the details needed and Lintian was run with appropriate
options and reports no issues, that'd be a significant improvement over
the current status quo.

-- 
 \   “The best in us does not require the worst in us: Our love of |
  `\ other human beings does not need to be nurtured by delusion.” |
_o__) —Sam Harris, at _Beyond Belief 2006_ |
Ben Finney


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxgpibeg@benfinney.id.au

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Kilian Krause]

Hi Paul,

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 11:04:49PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause  wrote:
> 
> > Until that happens though I've put together a somewhat lenghty test-script
> > that I usually run on my resulting packages after they are built as a review
> > process. And if that fails, I'll report it back to the list like anyone
> > else. Would be greath though if we could improve that situation.
> 
> Could you publish that script somewhere and link it from this wiki page?
> 
> http://wiki.debian.org/SponsorChecklist

Added some initial page. Will probably need some updating later on.


> > Does anyone know the current status of the new mentors.d.n?
> 
> Hasn't seen many commits recently, info:
> 
> http://wiki.debian.org/Debexpo

Actually all three site listed there are down. So to me this seems pretty
much like MIA. That was why I thought maybe we can revive this and get it
rolled out the door together? Any takers?

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Karl Goetz]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 22:47:24 +0200
Paul Wise  wrote:

> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.

Up front: I'm not entirely sure whats in the template as its some time
since i've used it (yay for teams).

I've wondered why the result of lintian wasn't automatically included
in the template, in a non-user-serviceable kind of way already. It
would allow sponsors to look at the rfs and say 'thats not clean, they
say it is, probably better places to spend my time'.

Thats not to say doco shouldn't be updated to make it obvious lintian
needs running before upload...

thanks,
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Karl Goetz]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200
Benoît Knecht  wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> Paul Wise wrote:
> > It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be
> > lintian clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually
> > be lintian clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could
> > we change it to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to
> > actually use lintian and fix any issues found.
> 
> I think three things are currently unclear:

Are they unclear in specific documents, or in general?

>   - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
> package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
> package (I know I used to run it on the .dsc file without
> realizing it wasn't checking the binary package).

This isn't mentioned on [1], should it be suggested for inclusion?
[1] http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/maintainer-intro

> 
>   - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.

Why is that? the manual entry for --pedantic says
>   Pedantic tags are Lintian at its most pickiest and
> include checks for particular Debian packaging styles and checks that
>   many people disagree with.  Expect false positives and
> Lintian tags that you don't consider useful if you use this option.
>   Adding overrides for pedantic tags is probably not
> worth the effort.
Wouldn't requiring people show tags that aren't relevant just train
them to ignore lintian?

>   - And always use the latest version from unstable.

or backports, for those on stable :)

> Would writing something like "Paste the output of lintian -I
> --pedantic your_package.changes" instead of filling that line
> automatically in the template be a better option? I would imagine
> people would then try to fix any issues before blindly sending the
> message to mentors.

or they wouldn't bother to paste anything into the box :/
thanks,
kk

> 
> Cheers,
> 


-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Andrew Starr-Bochicchio]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Charles Plessy  wrote:
> Le Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise a écrit :
>> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
>> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
>> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
>> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
>> lintian and fix any issues found.
>
> Hi,
>
> sbuild can run lintian and include its results plus a parsable pseudo-RFC-822
> field to indicate if the built package passes the test or not.  The RFS
> template could recommend to publish build logs including such iformation.

While we're sharing, here's a pbuilder hook that I (among others) use:

$ cat ~/.pbuilder-hooks/B20lintian
#!/bin/bash
#
# run lintian on generated deb files
echo "  STARTING LINTIAN HOOK  "
apt-get install -y --force-yes lintian
lintian -iIEm --pedantic --color=auto --allow-root /tmp/buildd/*.deb
echo "  FINISHED LINTIAN HOOK  "


-- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio

   Ubuntu Developer 
   Debian Contributor

   PGP/GPG Key ID: D53FDCB1


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAL6k_Ayd9dRQtGhFjOXOpz-wLjyvX=fgvr8yk0b_m8cg2h+...@mail.gmail.com

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Rodolfo kix Garcia]

On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 00:35:51 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:

On 2011-07-08 00:34, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote:


One idea about how to check the packages is add the check in the the
.dupload.conf file.



Not sure about dupload, but dput has a --lintian option. :)


Example:

$preupload{'deb'} = 'lintian -v -i %1';

found in the dupload.conf (5) manpage.


Please, don't kill me about my comments. Thanks.

Regards,

kix.


[...]


~Niels


--
||// //\\// Rodolfo "kix" Garcia
||\\// //\\ http://www.kix.es/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ba7ed4db3efef1d684f0a9f5ca30c...@kix.es

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Charles Plessy]

Le Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise a écrit :
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.

Hi,

sbuild can run lintian and include its results plus a parsable pseudo-RFC-822
field to indicate if the built package passes the test or not.  The RFS
template could recommend to publish build logs including such iformation.

Have a nice day,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707224549.ga25...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Niels Thykier]

On 2011-07-08 00:34, Rodolfo kix Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> Paul Wise wrote:
>>> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
>>> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
>>> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
>>> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
>>> lintian and fix any issues found.
>>
>> I think three things are currently unclear:
>>
>>   - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
>> package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
>> package (I know I used to run it on the .dsc file without realizing
>> it wasn't checking the binary package).
> 
> When I tryed to use lintian, the first time, I read the manual page and
> it was not too clear. Looking for examples, you can found this, in the
> lintian manual (http://lintian.debian.org/manual/ch2.html)
> 
>   $ lintian -i libc5_5.4.38-1.deb   <- lintian over the deb file. In the
> html file do not mention the .changes file
> 

Yeah... the User manual is horribly outdated... patches welcome?

> [...]
> 
> One idea about how to check the packages is add the check in the the
> .dupload.conf file.
> 

Not sure about dupload, but dput has a --lintian option. :)

> Please, don't kill me about my comments. Thanks.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> kix.
> 
>> [...]

~Niels


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e1634c7.4060...@thykier.net

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Rodolfo kix Garcia]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:05:03 +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote:

Hi Paul,

Paul Wise wrote:
It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be 
lintian

clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change 
it

to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
lintian and fix any issues found.


I think three things are currently unclear:

  - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
package (I know I used to run it on the .dsc file without 
realizing

it wasn't checking the binary package).


When I tryed to use lintian, the first time, I read the manual page and 
it was not too clear. Looking for examples, you can found this, in the 
lintian manual (http://lintian.debian.org/manual/ch2.html)


  $ lintian -i libc5_5.4.38-1.deb   <- lintian over the deb file. In 
the html file do not mention the .changes file


Probably the info about lintian should be a little bit more clear for 
newbie users. YES, probably you are the master of the lintian and for 
you is clear, but not for people doing their first package.


One idea about how to check the packages is add the check in the the 
.dupload.conf file.


Please, don't kill me about my comments. Thanks.

Regards,

kix.


  - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.

  - And always use the latest version from unstable.

Would writing something like "Paste the output of lintian -I 
--pedantic
your_package.changes" instead of filling that line automatically in 
the

template be a better option? I would imagine people would then try to
fix any issues before blindly sending the message to mentors.

Cheers,

--
Benoît Knecht


--
||// //\\// Rodolfo "kix" Garcia
||\\// //\\ http://www.kix.es/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ea915c5536e27daa84f83798ae1b9...@kix.es

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[gregor herrmann]

On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 23:36:21 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:

> A little heads up; in lintian 2.5.1 and newer you can enable default
> settings for some options in your lintianrc (e.g. ~/.lintianrc):

Wow, that's cool -- thanks!
 

Cheers,
gregor
 
-- 
 .''`.   Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - PGP/GPG key ID: 0x8649AA06
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-NP: Kurt Ostbahn & die Chefpartie


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RFS: xxxterm (2nd attempt)

[Luis Henriques]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xxxterm".

* Package name: xxxterm
  Version : 1.399-1
  Upstream Author : Marco Peereboom , Stevan Andjelkovic 
, Edd Barrett , Todd T. Fries 

* URL : http://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/XXXTerm
* License : ISC
  Section : web

It builds these binary packages:
xxxterm- Minimalist's web browser

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 631655

My motivation for maintaining this package is:
I've been using xxxterm for a long time now, and I believe other users
could benefit from this package being available on the base Debian
distribution.

The number of users for this package will probably be a small subset of
all Debian users, as the web browser provided by it seems to have a
focus on security.  Thus, web power users will still be willing to user
other browsers such as iceweasel and chromium.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xxxterm
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main 
contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xxxterm/xxxterm_1.399-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards,
--
Luis Henriques


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87iprdwxi9@gmail.com

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Niels Thykier]

On 2011-07-07 23:05, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> Paul Wise wrote:
>> [...]
> 
> I think three things are currently unclear:
> 
>   - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
> package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
> package (I know I used to run it on the .dsc file without realizing
> it wasn't checking the binary package).
> 

The --verbose option might be useful here, it clearly shows when a new
package being processed.  Maybe this part should be on by default and
disabled with --quiet?

>   - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.
> 

A little heads up; in lintian 2.5.1 and newer you can enable default
settings for some options in your lintianrc (e.g. ~/.lintianrc):

"""
# defaults for --display-info, --pedantic and so on
display-info=yes
pedantic=yes
show-overrides=yes
display-experimental=yes
"""

Options that can be used in the lintianrc can be found in lintian(1).
Might be a good idea to promote this part to new people as well.

>   - And always use the latest version from unstable.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Cheers,
> 

~Niels


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e1626d5.5080...@thykier.net

Re: RFS: libgeier (updated package)

[Olaf Dietsche]

Paul Wise  writes:

> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Olaf Dietsche wrote:
>
>> The package appears to be lintian clean.
>
> Not really:
>
> I: libgeier source: missing-debian-source-format
> W: libgeier source: debian-rules-missing-recommended-target build-arch
> W: libgeier source: debian-rules-missing-recommended-target build-indep
> P: libgeier-dev: no-upstream-changelog
> E: libgeier-dev: non-empty-dependency_libs-in-la-file usr/lib/libgeier.la
> P: libgeier0: no-upstream-changelog
> I: libgeier0: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0

How do you get these warnings? When I do

$ lintian libgeier_0.12-0.1_amd64.changes

there is no output.

$ lintian --pedantic libgeier_0.12-0.1_amd64.changes

gives just:
P: libgeier-dev: no-upstream-changelog
P: libgeier0: no-upstream-changelog

which is no surprise, since upstream doesn't provide a changelog.
So, where do these other warnings come from?

Regards, Olaf


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877h7tbyoh@rat.lan

Re: RFS: flush (updated package)

[Sven Hoexter]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:44:01PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:

Hi,

> I decided to take this package (and renew it) for his horrible state in
> sid.

Uploaded, thanks.

Sven
-- 
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
 [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707211156.GA21640@marvin

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Benoît Knecht]

Hi Paul,

Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.

I think three things are currently unclear:

  - lintian should be run on the .changes file before uploading a
package to mentors, in order to check both the source and binary
package (I know I used to run it on the .dsc file without realizing
it wasn't checking the binary package).

  - The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.

  - And always use the latest version from unstable.

Would writing something like "Paste the output of lintian -I --pedantic
your_package.changes" instead of filling that line automatically in the
template be a better option? I would imagine people would then try to
fix any issues before blindly sending the message to mentors.

Cheers,

-- 
Benoît Knecht


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707210502.gc18...@marvin.lan

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Paul Wise]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Kilian Krause  wrote:

> Until that happens though I've put together a somewhat lenghty test-script
> that I usually run on my resulting packages after they are built as a review
> process. And if that fails, I'll report it back to the list like anyone
> else. Would be greath though if we could improve that situation.

Could you publish that script somewhere and link it from this wiki page?

http://wiki.debian.org/SponsorChecklist

> Does anyone know the current status of the new mentors.d.n?

Hasn't seen many commits recently, info:

http://wiki.debian.org/Debexpo

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6enlne3trtoz5qkntfbg1tezihcxftid5hzc33cwks...@mail.gmail.com

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Kilian Krause]

Paul,

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 10:47:24PM +0200, Paul Wise wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.

I guess it'd help to make that line read:

lintian -F gave:
[...]
lintian --pedantic -I reports however:
[...]

Or something alike.

Apart from that I still hope the new mentors.d.n (for full list of good
ideas see [1]) will come alive and allow us to make automatic checks
possible.

Until that happens though I've put together a somewhat lenghty test-script
that I usually run on my resulting packages after they are built as a review
process. And if that fails, I'll report it back to the list like anyone
else. Would be greath though if we could improve that situation.

Does anyone know the current status of the new mentors.d.n?

[1]: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsNet

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: libgeier (updated package)

[Paul Wise]

On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 22:53 +0200, Olaf Dietsche wrote:

> So, where do these other warnings come from?

From my bash configuration:

alias lintian='lintian --info --display-info --display-experimental --pedantic 
--show-overrides --checksums --color auto'

And always use the latest lintian from sid/experimental.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Nicolas]

Hi all,

I think the main problem is the default level of warning/error for lintian.
Even for my first package I ran lintian but my package seems to be lintian
clean !!
Now I run lintian with theses parameters : lintian -IivEcm --pedantic
*.changes

It's a but strict but help me find problem.

Regards,
Nicolas

2011/7/7 Paul Wise 

> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.
>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive:
> http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ffj4eaadku34bkzj5fq57tw-dhudpevv6-gzv+xkj...@mail.gmail.com
>
>

Re: how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Paul Tagliamonte]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Paul Wise  wrote:
> It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
> clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
> clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
> to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
> lintian and fix any issues found.

INADD, but:

We do have part of the upload on m.d.n, I have a hunch it'd be fairly
simple to actually run Lintian on it, and report the status of the
package.

The trouble is that the uploads may or may not have the binary
package, so it would have to be a bit "smart" about what it's actually
checking.

>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: 
> http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ffj4eaadku34bkzj5fq57tw-dhudpevv6-gzv+xkj...@mail.gmail.com
>
>

I'm a big +1 on this, I hate seeing "lintian clean" packages report a
litany of issues :)

Cheers,
Paul

-- 
All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.

#define sizeof(x) rand()
:wq


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAO6P2QTXW84zOJNwQoQsvKoVZq+bOFG=xe-djmjy_r51y5k...@mail.gmail.com

how to get people to run lintian on their packages

[Paul Wise]

It is rare to see an RFS that says "The package appears to be lintian
clean." and the package (especially binary ones) actually be lintian
clean. If we were to change the RFS template, what could we change it
to in order to encourage accuracy and for people to actually use
lintian and fix any issues found.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ffj4eaadku34bkzj5fq57tw-dhudpevv6-gzv+xkj...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: libpar2 (reupload to Debian)

[Paul Wise]

There is one lintian warning:

I: libpar2-0: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libpar2.so.0.0.1

Two cppcheck warnings:

[libpar2.h:29]: (error) Memory leak: LibPar2::par1Repairer
[libpar2.h:30]: (error) Memory leak: LibPar2::par2Repairer

Since you are essentially upstream now, will you be attempting to get
admin access to the upstream sourceforge project?

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6hjnpgh_ybnbkhovqklvaxggnmatptubhmamsnbkgm...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: libpar2 (reupload to Debian)

[Andreas Moog]

On 07/07/2011 09:53 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Andreas Moog wrote:
> 
>> dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libpar2/libpar2_0.2-2.dsc
> 
> I am unable to unpack the source package:
> 
> dpkg-source: error: File ./libpar2_0.2.orig.tar.gz has size 401700
> instead of expected 403492

Hmm, interesting.

'git-buildpackage -S' with pristine-tar produces a different sized
orig.tar.gz. I need to investigate that. For now, fixed by using the
tarball downloaded from upstream instead of using gpb's reconstructed one.

Thanks.

Andreas



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: RFS: libgeier (updated package)

[Paul Wise]

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Olaf Dietsche wrote:

> The package appears to be lintian clean.

Not really:

I: libgeier source: missing-debian-source-format
W: libgeier source: debian-rules-missing-recommended-target build-arch
W: libgeier source: debian-rules-missing-recommended-target build-indep
P: libgeier-dev: no-upstream-changelog
E: libgeier-dev: non-empty-dependency_libs-in-la-file usr/lib/libgeier.la
P: libgeier0: no-upstream-changelog
I: libgeier0: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0

There are a bunch of GCC warnings.

dpkg-shlibdeps warnings:

dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libm.so.6 could be avoided if
"debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0" were not uselessly linked
against it (they use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libplc4.so.0d could be avoided
if "debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0
debian/libgeier0/usr/bin/geier" were not uselessly linked against it
(they use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libnssutil3.so.1d could be
avoided if "debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0
debian/libgeier0/usr/bin/geier" were not uselessly linked against it
(they use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libdl.so.2 could be avoided if
"debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0
debian/libgeier0/usr/bin/geier" were not uselessly linked against it
(they use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libplds4.so.0d could be avoided
if "debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0
debian/libgeier0/usr/bin/geier" were not uselessly linked against it
(they use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libssl3.so.1d could be avoided
if "debian/libgeier0/usr/lib/libgeier.so.0.0.0
debian/libgeier0/usr/bin/geier" were not uselessly linked against it
(they use none of its symbols).

Some cppcheck warnings:

src/gzip_inflate.c:58]: (error) Common realloc mistake: 'buf' nulled
but not freed upon failure
tests/test_pkcs7_decrypt.c:60]: (error) Common realloc mistake: 'ptr'
nulled but not freed upon failure

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6ft6_tdruvym-7fplli17ja2od_5uktvu9s7dyk+qy...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: libpar2 (reupload to Debian)

[Paul Wise]

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Andreas Moog wrote:

> dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libpar2/libpar2_0.2-2.dsc

I am unable to unpack the source package:

dpkg-source: error: File ./libpar2_0.2.orig.tar.gz has size 401700
instead of expected 403492

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6Gm74oWUR_vPU4kK7UBQa0DgJnTmZ8F5=WTNvr=wz9...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Daniel Echeverry]

Hi

2011/7/7 Paul Wise 

> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
> > 2011/7/7 Paul Wise 
> >> The upstream README.md file contains installation information that
> >> isn't relevant to users of binary packages. Looking at the rest of the
> >> content, that is covered by the manual page. IIRC README.md files are
> >> used by github to make a web page. I would suggest dropping this file
> >> from the Debian package
> >
> > Removed!
>
> I don't think adding a README.Debian file about that is needed :)
>
> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv/sxiv_0.8.2-3.dsc
>
> I took the liberty of dropping the README.Debian file and uploaded.
>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
>
Thank you very much!!!


-- 
Epsilon
http://www.rinconinformatico.net
http://www.fitnessdeportes.com
http://www.dragonjar.org
Linux user: #477840
Debian user

Re: RFS: flush (updated package)

[Fabrizio Regalli]

Hi Sven,

Il giorno gio, 07/07/2011 alle 21.37 +0200, Sven Hoexter ha scritto:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:46PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> 
> Hi Fabrizio,
> 
> > Really strange.
> > I tried to install and use it before request sponsor, and I have not
> > found errors
> 
> I've no doubt in that, it's possible that there's something wrong with the
> dbus stuff here. 

No worries :-)

I tested it again, with dbus-daemon running:

~$ flush

(flush:13610): GLib-WARNING
**: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0

(flush:13610): GLib-WARNING
**: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (16) on option of type 4

(flush:13610): GLib-WARNING
**: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0

(same waring)

and after a second I see the GUI interface for flush.


> With the devil sitting on my shoulder I could still
> upload it and fill a bug afterwards. 

Tell me if you want modify something before upload: I can modify the
package without any problem.


> The state of the package in unstable
> can't get worse anyway.

Totally agree! 
I decided to take this package (and renew it) for his horrible state in
sid.


Thank you.
Cheers,

Fabrizio.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Paul Wise]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
> 2011/7/7 Paul Wise 
>> The upstream README.md file contains installation information that
>> isn't relevant to users of binary packages. Looking at the rest of the
>> content, that is covered by the manual page. IIRC README.md files are
>> used by github to make a web page. I would suggest dropping this file
>> from the Debian package
>
> Removed!

I don't think adding a README.Debian file about that is needed :)

> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv/sxiv_0.8.2-3.dsc

I took the liberty of dropping the README.Debian file and uploaded.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6gectx2vowyshnhttgbtdkr7ru9vwbukud34fiez_v...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: flush (updated package)

[Sven Hoexter]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 09:17:46PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:

Hi Fabrizio,

> Really strange.
> I tried to install and use it before request sponsor, and I have not
> found errors

I've no doubt in that, it's possible that there's something wrong with the
dbus stuff here. With the devil sitting on my shoulder I could still
upload it and fill a bug afterwards. The state of the package in unstable
can't get worse anyway.

Sven
-- 
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
 [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707193702.GB19521@marvin

Re: RFS: wav2cdr (updated package)

[Sven Hoexter]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:59:26PM -0500, Edgar Antonio Palma de la Cruz wrote:
> Dear mentors,
> 
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.3.4-1 of my package 
> "wav2cdr".

Uploaded, thanks.

Sven
-- 
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
 [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707193119.GA19521@marvin

Re: RFS: flush (updated package)

[Fabrizio Regalli]

Hi Sven,

and thanks for your review.

Il giorno gio, 07/07/2011 alle 21.12 +0200, Sven Hoexter ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:21:50PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.9.10-1
> > of my package "flush".
> 
> Some 'LDFLAGS += -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,--as-needed' should help to get
> the depedency list a bit shortened. 

Ok, I can add this flags.


> Otherwise the package looks fine
> and I would be willing to upload it, but it fails to start here.
> 
> (flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
> /build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
>  ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0
> 
> (flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
> /build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
>  ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (16) on option of type 4
> 
> (flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
> /build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
>  ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0
> W: Creating Flush session failed. Can't get DBus session bus address.
> 
> I've to admit that I've no idea about dbus except that dbus-daemon is running.

Really strange.
I tried to install and use it before request sponsor, and I have not
found errors

(I'm in doubt if dbus-daemon was running or not during my test)

I'm trying again to build, install and use for see what happen.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Fabrizio.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: flush (updated package)

[Sven Hoexter]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 10:21:50PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:

Hi,

> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.9.10-1
> of my package "flush".

Some 'LDFLAGS += -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,--as-needed' should help to get
the depedency list a bit shortened. Otherwise the package looks fine
and I would be willing to upload it, but it fails to start here.

(flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0

(flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (16) on option of type 4

(flush:4437): GLib-WARNING **: 
/build/buildd-glib2.0_2.28.6-1-i386-A3fp41/glib2.0-2.28.6/./glib/goption.c:2132:
 ignoring no-arg, optional-arg or filename flags (8) on option of type 0
W: Creating Flush session failed. Can't get DBus session bus address.

I've to admit that I've no idea about dbus except that dbus-daemon is running.

Sven
-- 
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
 [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707191216.GI2274@marvin

Re: RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Daniel Echeverry]

Hi Paul

2011/7/7 Paul Wise 

> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
>
> > sxiv   - simple X image viewer
>
> The package is already uploaded by kilian, but here is a review of
> things you could fix:
>
> The upstream README.md file contains installation information that
> isn't relevant to users of binary packages. Looking at the rest of the
> content, that is covered by the manual page. IIRC README.md files are
> used by github to make a web page. I would suggest dropping this file
> from the Debian package
>

Removed!


> In the watch file, I would suggest ([\d\.]+) instead of (.*) which
> will prevent getting random branches in the DEHS output.
>


Done!


> Looking at the upstream source code (config.h), a line like this in
> debian/control might be appropriate:
>
> Suggests: libjpeg-progs, imagemagick
>
>
Done!


> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
>
Please check out:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv/sxiv_0.8.2-3.dsc

Thank you very much!

-- 
Epsilon
http://www.rinconinformatico.net
http://www.fitnessdeportes.com
http://www.dragonjar.org
Linux user: #477840
Debian user

Re: RFS: arp-scan (updated package, new maintainer)

[William Vera]

Hi

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Kilian Krause  wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 12:43 -0500, William Vera wrote:
>> Package updated
>
> Built, Signed, Uploaded. Thanks!
>

Thanks :)

> You may want to try to push #481296 forward and make the oui resp.
> ethervendors package finally happen. Then have the next arp-scan package
> can depend on that instead of including the oui.txt into arp-scan
> itself.
>
> Since that bug is dead since 2009 I guess it would help to push this a
> bit again so that this common shared package will finally make it to the
> Debian archive. But please coordinate with the other contributors to
> that bug before performing any action though.


Let me check what I can do about it

>
> --
> Best regards,
> Kilian
>

Thanks again Kilian!
Regards

-- 
William Vera 
PGP Key: 1024D/F5CC22A4
Fingerprint: 3E73 FA1F 5C57 6005 0439  4D75 1FD2 BF96 F5CC 22A4


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAPQrxN+j46WMiH8VoO34u7QBo-VtY6yK0swnuq2+LTU0BX=e...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: qasmixer

[Kilian Krause]

Hi Sebastian,

On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 04:13:14PM +0200, Sebastian H. wrote:
> The new package source is uploaded.

looking closer at your package I find the following:

1. It's an intial upload to Debian AFAICT. Yet your debian/changelog is
   cluttered with a number of entries already. For an initial upload it's
   good practice to have only one entry in debian/changelog with the closing
   entry to the ITP bug as already stated. If for any reasonable explanation
   of your packaging more lines are neccessary, you can leave them in, but
   consider that this is a first time starter without history from a Debian
   POV.


2. Your debian/watch doesn't work. Yield remote version -0.12.0
   Even if corrected this makes it virtually impossible to compare with the
   original upstream tarball if that upstream version isn't yet available
   for public download.

   Btw. the correct regexp would be:
   http://sf.net/qasmixer/qasmixer-(.+)\.tar\.gz

   As you're upstream yourself you may want to publish the 0.12.1 version
   first though instead of basing your Debian package on a tarball that
   *may* not be yet official and thus final. Point is, we don't know. ;-)


3. You explicitly put versioned Depends for your binary. Some of them are
   even overriden by dh_makeshlibs and replaced with more recent versions.
   What's the reason you don't simply rely upon ${shlibs:Depends} and
   ${misc:Depends} to catch all required libs in their correct version?

   For example, you put libqt4-svg (>= 4.6.3) but the final deb has
   libqt4-svg (>= 4:4.5.3) which is newer due to the epoch (leading 4:) - is
   that what you intended? Same goes for libqt4-network and libqtgui4.


4. You may want to run your short and long description past a native English
   speaker's review. One easily grasps what you're trying to express, but
   IMHO it could be worded more smoothly. Just my peronal oppinion though
   and purely cosmetic change. ;-)
   I'm sure the debian-l10n-engl...@lists.debian.org folks will be happy to
   help you here.

Apart from that good work and ready for upload.

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Paul Wise]

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Daniel Echeverry wrote:

> sxiv       - simple X image viewer

The package is already uploaded by kilian, but here is a review of
things you could fix:

The upstream README.md file contains installation information that
isn't relevant to users of binary packages. Looking at the rest of the
content, that is covered by the manual page. IIRC README.md files are
used by github to make a web page. I would suggest dropping this file
from the Debian package

In the watch file, I would suggest ([\d\.]+) instead of (.*) which
will prevent getting random branches in the DEHS output.

Looking at the upstream source code (config.h), a line like this in
debian/control might be appropriate:

Suggests: libjpeg-progs, imagemagick

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caktje6fx96wq9c8-vxnsy080a+f0xw3ttfxv2anyrgucfjo...@mail.gmail.com

Re: RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Kilian Krause]

Daniel,

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 12:05:12PM -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
> Dear mentors,
> 
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-2
> of my package "sxiv".
> 
> It builds these binary packages:
> sxiv   - simple X image viewer
> 
> The package appears to be lintian clean.
> 
> The upload would fix these bugs: 632914
> 
> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
> - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv
> - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main
> contrib non-free
> - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv/sxiv_0.8.2-2.dsc
> 
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Reviewed, Built, Signed, Uploaded.

Thanks!

-- 
Cheers,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: pidgin-latex.

[Elías Alejandro]

Hi Kilian,
On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 05:18:01PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote:
> Thanks for stepping up as new maintainer for this interesting package.
> 
yes, It was useful for me sometime ago.

> I see you're including CHANGES as docs which is not required. It'll get
> installed twice then and end up as both CHANGELOG and changelog.gz in
> the deb. (=> Removed)
> 
Thanks, I've forgot remove it.

> Moreover your short description lacks one "h" (at wich - should be
> which) and it also lacks a comment that this plugin is only a local
> rendering and doesn't transmit images accross to your chat/IM-partner
> who will also have to install the plugin to enjoy the full
> functionality. (=> Updated)
> 
> LaTeX.[ch] have still have the old FSF address which you may want to
> tell upstream so that they can fix it.
> 
I'll notify to upstream author about your comments.

> As you've also opened your own ITP I guess it'd make sense to close that
> as well for cosmetic reasons - even though they should be closed both
> through the already existing link. (=> Added)
> 
I'm agree with _makeup_ reasons. :)
I'll take into account.

> Apart from that, IMHO fine to be uploaded.
> 
> Thus I've taken the above mentioned measures in () and sponsored your
> package. You can find my upload at
> http://people.debian.org/~kilian/pidgin-latex/
Ok, I've just download. Thanks a lot for your valuable help.


Regards,

--
Elías Alejandro


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110707172916.GA2451@debianero

RFS: sxiv (updated package)

[Daniel Echeverry]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-2
of my package "sxiv".

It builds these binary packages:
sxiv   - simple X image viewer

The package appears to be lintian clean.

The upload would fix these bugs: 632914

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main
contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sxiv/sxiv_0.8.2-2.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Kind regards
 daniel echeverry

-- 
Epsilon
http://www.rinconinformatico.net
http://www.fitnessdeportes.com
http://www.dragonjar.org
Linux user: #477840
Debian user

Re: RFS: arp-scan (updated package, new maintainer)

[Kilian Krause]

Tim,

On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 05:00:00PM +0100, Tim Brown wrote:
> On Thursday 07 July 2011 07:55:48 Kilian Krause wrote:
[...]
> > Since that bug is dead since 2009 I guess it would help to push this a
> > bit again so that this common shared package will finally make it to the
> > Debian archive. But please coordinate with the other contributors to
> > that bug before performing any action though.
> 
> We did try to make this happen but there are a good number of packages that 
> need to make the change.  One thing might just be to do it for arp-scan and 
> email others to tell them it is done.

That was the idea. Once a working version will be in the archive it should
be piece of cake to have the others update their packages to use the
"shared" file like with jquery.js et al..

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Git and tarballs

[Joey Hess]

Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> How can I create this delta? The man page says only about creating a delta
> for a tarball without a directory.

The delta is created for you when you run pristine-tar commit.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: RFS: arp-scan (updated package, new maintainer)

[Tim Brown]

On Thursday 07 July 2011 07:55:48 Kilian Krause wrote:
> Hi William,
> 
> On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 12:43 -0500, William Vera wrote:
> > 2011/7/6 Kilian Krause :
> > > On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 18:23 -0600, René Mayorga wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 08:45:41AM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote:
> > >> > Tim, are you agreed that William takes over or do you want to remain
> > >> > as uploader/co-maintainer?
> > >> 
> > >> Please let him a co-maint for a while, since he is active but busy at
> > >> this momment.
> > > 
> > > Sounds fine to me. Could you please prepare an upload that would
> > > reflect this in a way you both are ok with?
> > > 
> > > I guess letting Tim as Maintainer and putting you into Uploaders would
> > > do the trick - together with an update in debian/changelog. Unless
> > > there is some mail alias/list you want to use together.
> > 
> > Package updated
> 
> Built, Signed, Uploaded. Thanks!
> 
> You may want to try to push #481296 forward and make the oui resp.
> ethervendors package finally happen. Then have the next arp-scan package
> can depend on that instead of including the oui.txt into arp-scan
> itself.
> 
> Since that bug is dead since 2009 I guess it would help to push this a
> bit again so that this common shared package will finally make it to the
> Debian archive. But please coordinate with the other contributors to
> that bug before performing any action though.

We did try to make this happen but there are a good number of packages that 
need to make the change.  One thing might just be to do it for arp-scan and 
email others to tell them it is done.

Tim
-- 
Tim Brown




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: RE : : RFS: autoconf-archive (updated package)

[Kilian Krause]

Hi Bastien,

On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 07:50 +0200, roucaries bastien wrote:
> Please do not upload directly, i will upload git tree before under
> collab maint and postthe final ppackage here.
> 
> It is more a rfc.
> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/autoconf-archive/autoconf-archive_2011.04.12-1.dsc

Comments are:

1. debian/autoconf-archive.doc-base.autoconf-archive should most
probably be named debian/autoconf-archive.doc-base

2. Me personally I'd prefer seeing that CDBS be ditched in favour of dh

3. your indentation in debian/changelog is somewhat lacking the second
level for your "- " items

4. The version that's on mentors.d.n does FTBFS for me in pbuilder with:
--(snip)--
make[2]: Entering directory
`/tmp/buildd/autoconf-archive-2011.04.12/doc'
rm -rf autoconf-archive.htp
if /bin/bash /tmp/buildd/autoconf-archive-2011.04.12/build-aux/missing
--run makeinfo --html   -I . \
 -o autoconf-archive.htp autoconf-archive.texi; \
then \
  rm -rf autoconf-archive.html; \
  if test ! -d autoconf-archive.htp && test -d autoconf-archive; then \
mv autoconf-archive autoconf-archive.html; else mv
autoconf-archive.htp autoconf-archive.html; fi; \
else \
  if test ! -d autoconf-archive.htp && test -d autoconf-archive; then \
rm -rf autoconf-archive; else rm -Rf autoconf-archive.htp
autoconf-archive.html; fi; \
  exit 1; \
fi
/tmp/buildd/autoconf-archive-2011.04.12/build-aux/missing: line 52:
makeinfo: command not found
WARNING: `makeinfo' is missing on your system.  You should only need it
if
 you modified a `.texi' or `.texinfo' file, or any other file
 indirectly affecting the aspect of the manual.  The spurious
 call might also be the consequence of using a buggy
`make' (AIX,
 DU, IRIX).  You might want to install the `Texinfo' package or
 the `GNU make' package.  Grab either from any GNU archive site.
make[2]: *** [autoconf-archive.html] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/autoconf-archive-2011.04.12/doc'
make[1]: *** [html-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/autoconf-archive-2011.04.12'
make: *** [debian/stamp-makefile-build] Error 2
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2
--(snip)--

5. As Deng Xiyue has retired, I think it'd be ok to remove him entirely
from the Uploaders field.

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: pidgin-latex.

[Kilian Krause]

Hi Elías,

On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 16:15 -0500, Elías Alejandro wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pidgin-latex".
> 
> * Package name: pidgin-latex
>  Version  : 1.4.4-1
>  Upstream Author  : Benjamin Moll 
> * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/pidgin-latex/
> * License : GPL-2
>  Section  : net
> 
> It builds these binary packages:
> pidgin-latex - Pidgin plugin to display LaTeX formula
> 
> The package appears to be lintian clean.
> 
> The upload would fix these bugs: 520658
> 
> My motivation for maintaining this package is: usefull
> plugin to show our math formulas for pidgin.
> 
> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
> - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pidgin-latex
> - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main 
> contrib non-free
> - dget 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pidgin-latex/pidgin-latex_1.4.4-1.dsc
> 
> A guide about pidgin-latex could be found: 
> http://www.wangtang.de/pidgin-latex/
> 
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.

Thanks for stepping up as new maintainer for this interesting package.

I see you're including CHANGES as docs which is not required. It'll get
installed twice then and end up as both CHANGELOG and changelog.gz in
the deb. (=> Removed)

Moreover your short description lacks one "h" (at wich - should be
which) and it also lacks a comment that this plugin is only a local
rendering and doesn't transmit images accross to your chat/IM-partner
who will also have to install the plugin to enjoy the full
functionality. (=> Updated)

LaTeX.[ch] have still have the old FSF address which you may want to
tell upstream so that they can fix it.

As you've also opened your own ITP I guess it'd make sense to close that
as well for cosmetic reasons - even though they should be closed both
through the already existing link. (=> Added)

Apart from that, IMHO fine to be uploaded.

Thus I've taken the above mentioned measures in () and sponsored your
package. You can find my upload at
http://people.debian.org/~kilian/pidgin-latex/

-- 
Best regards,
Kilian


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RFS: Sponsor needed for pmwiki

[Strobl, Robert]

Yes, thank you all :)
I'm currently working in your feedback
and hope that I can give an update this week-end.

Best regards,
Robert

Am 07.07.2011 um 11:10 schrieb Thomas Goirand:

> On 07/04/2011 09:17 AM, Strobl, Robert wrote:
>> I need a sponsor for:
>> 
>> Package name:pmwiki
>> Version: 2.2.27
>> Upstream Author: Patrick R. Michaud
>> License: GPL
>> Description: "PmWiki is a wiki-based system for 
>> collaborative creation and maintenance of websites."
>> 
>> The relevant files can be found at http://share.gloriabyte.de/pmwiki/
>> 
>> This would close: #330117, #471816, #508725
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Robert
>> 
>> 
> Hi,
> 
> Did you read our reply to your request in debian-mentors@?
> 
> Thomas
> 


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/81e87ff9-a729-4813-93b8-ac530d7c0...@student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de

Re: RFS: libpam-abl

[Alex Mestiashvili]

On 06/28/2011 02:12 PM, Etienne Millon wrote:

Hello,

I had a look at your package. Please not that I am not a DD, and so I
can't sponsor your contribution.

Build
-

Your package builds in a clean sid chroot.

Lintian
---

Your package is _not_ lintian clean. Here are the warnings upto -E:

   - I: libpam-abl source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field
 "section" in package libpam-abl

 This one is easy to fix, you can just remove the Section: line
 from the binary package.

   - I: libpam-abl: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/pam_abl Unkown Unknown

 This one should be easy too, you can patch src/tools/pam_abl.c
 near line 565. Upstream will probably be interested.

   - I: libpam-abl: description-synopsis-might-not-be-phrased-properly

 The full stop is not needed.

   - O: libpam-abl: manpage-has-errors-from-man
 usr/share/man/man1/pam_abl.1.gz 169: warning: macro `HTML-TAG' not
 defined

   - O: libpam-abl: manpage-has-errors-from-man
 usr/share/man/man5/pam_abl.conf.5.gz 169: warning: macro `HTML-TAG'
 not defined

   - O: libpam-abl: manpage-has-errors-from-man
 usr/share/man/man8/pam_abl.8.gz 169: warning: macro `HTML-TAG' not
 defined

 Instead of setting an override, you can probably patch the
 manpages. This could also be related to a docbook bug.

debian/changelog


   - "Initial release" is probably better than "New upstream release"
 as it is the first one :).
   - The two ITPs have been merged, so it is only necessary to close
 one of them.

debian/rules


   - There is a trailing space line 6.
   - Line 9 could be wrapped.

debian/control
--

   - (see about the lintian warnings)
   - Both your short and extended descriptions start with "pam_abl",
 which is probably not informative enough. Other PAM modules seem
 to use phrasings such as "PAM module blocking host which are
 attempting a brute force attack"
   - The versioned build-dep against debhelper can probably be bumped
 at least to 8 (and debian/compat set to this value to), but I am
 not sure about the exact version number.

Hope that helps !

   

Hi ,

I've uploaded a new version with mentioned fixes .
I didn't touch overrides because don't know how to fix these warnings , 
also I see that linitian complains about other packages as well .( samba 
for example )


Thank you ,
Alex



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e156206.1040...@biotec.tu-dresden.de

Re: Git and tarballs

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 02:31:02PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Does pristine-tar work if the upstream branch contains files which have 
> > > been 
> > > removed during repack?
> > Unfortunately the directory and the tarball must have identical contents.
> 
> That's not true, but the larger the difference the larger the delta file
> will be.
How can I create this delta? The man page says only about creating a delta
for a tarball without a directory.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature